I have been a CPA for over 30 years focusing on taxation. I have extensive experience with partnerships, real estate and high net worth individuals.
My ideology can be summarized at least metaphorically by this quote:
"I have a total irreverence for anything connected with society except that which makes the roads safer, the beer stronger, the food cheaper and the old men and old women warmer in the winter and happier in the summer." - Brendan Behan
Nobody I work for has any responsibility for what goes into this blog and you should make no inference that they approve of it or even have read it.

I at least look at every Tax Court decision and actually read most of them. I look for items of practical value, matter for reflection and humor in deciding which ones to write about. Mainly, I like the cases that have interesting stories to them which made Ms. Hovind’s case practically irresistible. If there is interest in the story, I will follow other aspects of it. That accounts for the two posts I have so far done on the Hovinds. This third and possible final one will seek to address one of the many questions that have been raised. Basically has the government been picking on the Hovinds out of hostility to “creation science” ?

Creation Science

I have seen at least one comment on another site to the effect that I obviously don’t know much about creation science. Guilty. The explanations that I put in the previous posts were meant just to alert readers to the general nature of the argument. Let me try it again. If you are a Christian who accepts the concept of “scriptural inerrancy” and you adopt a literal interpretation of Genesis, which not all Christians, even all conservative Christians do, you will conclude that the earth is about 6,000 years old. If you go into the geology or biology departments of most colleges and universities, you will have a really hard time finding a lot of support for that view. Hence the need for creation scientists to expose the errors of establishment science, which, since it contradicts Genesis, must be wrong.

OK. Here’s the deal. I’m not taking a public position on that issue, but I welcome commenters who wish to use the space below as a forum to talk about things like helium in zircons, radioactive half-lives and people running around with dinosaurs. I’ll probably call your comments out and I won’t delete them unless you violate my entirely arbitrary and constantly changing standards of decorum. Generally speaking, try to be kind to the poor deluded people who hold the view opposite yours and I’ll be glad to have you here.

Is The Federal Government Persecuting Creationists ?

If the Federal Government is persecuting creationists, it is doing a very poor job of it. According to Gallup 46% of Americans believe that God created humans, as they are now, less than 10,000 years ago. The percentage has not changed much in the last thirty years. Of course lack of progress does not prove lack of intent, but there is other evidence that, they are not even trying.

Check out the Form 990 of Answers in Genesis, Inc which grossed nearly 25 million dollars in the fiscal year ended 6/30/11. The people of the Creation Science Hall of Fame hope that when their hall takes tangible form it will be a neighbor of AiG’s Creation Museum. AiG is working on an Ark Encounter theme park. There is talk of it being a public private partnership with state economic aid because of its development impact. AiG is merely one of the largests exempt organizations collecting tax deductible contributions to spread the word.

Bottom line, it seems rather unlikely that when federal agents went into Kent Hovind’s Dinosaur Adventure Land, it had anything to do with what was being taught there.

Corporation Sole

“Corporation Sole” is a way to vest title to property in the holder of an office. It makes sense for hierarchical organizations where the office holder is subject to appointment and removal. It does not make sense for individual led ministries particularly those that do not have an independent board. There is no way to distinguish between the property of the ministry and the individual controlling the ministry. From reading the Tax Court decision in Jo Hovind’s case, it is pretty clear that “Corporation Sole” and the associated bells and whistles are at the root of the Hovinds tax problems.

On May 12, 2003, Mr. Hovind created a personal ministry using the CSE Foundation Trust package Mr. Stoll provided. Mr. Hovind executed formal written trust agreements for two trusts, Creation Science Evangelism Ministry and the Creation Science Evanglism Foundation. Mr. Hovind named the Director of Ecclesiastical Enterprises and the Firm Foundation, corporations sole established by Mr. Stoll, as trustees. In the trust package both the Director of Ecclesiastical Enterprises and the Firm Foundation are identified as being under the jurisdiction of the “Kingdom of Heaven”. Mr. Hovind is listed as the “CEO Manager” of Creation Science Evangelism Ministry. Petitioner is listed as the “First Position Successor”.

Mr. Hovind’s Defense

You can find extensive documentation of Mr. Hovind’s defense on this site. I have corresponded with him a bit and he places particular emphais on this document. It is a memorandum of law to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. It is focused on the defects he preceives in his original indictment. To kick off our discussion he wanted me to give him an opinion on it (To be fair I should mention that he offered to discuss numerous things that I alluded to in my post. One of his messages to me is on his facebook page labelled how to debate an evolutionist.) He specified one at a time. I may hear more from him, but at the present time, when it comes to discussions about the federal government, he seems to be focused on the legal flaws in the government’s prosecution of him. The Eleventh Circuit did uphold his conviction, but apparently he still thinks there is hope.

If you study the documents and agree with him or think he should be free for some other reason, you can sign a petition for his release here. And of course:

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Peter, I include all those who have died unnecessarily due of illness that could be cured, or prevented. Religiously motivated prevention of medical research has a long history. Even today there are strong efforts to block stem cell research and provision of cheap and competent contraception.

I was trying to provide some balance so that “we” didn’t stray more than a “bit” in trying to consider how “we” might give some consideration to Gary’s opinions on what he considers “weightier matters”.

One of the issues in the Hovind case (there’s so many of them) is the one where Kent Hovind tries to make out that his alleged persecution included such allegedly absurd charges as praying on the radio for Special Agent Scott Schneider.

What is with that?

I don’t know the whole story, but I think I found enough to illustrate further how it is that Kent Hovind simply can’t be trusted to tell the truth about such things.

I report, you decide! Following are three reports regarding that matter; two from Kent Hovind and one from what appears to be published report in the Pensacola News Journal newspaper. Those are followed by a quote I transcribed from the indictment.

(1)

http://www.2peter3.com/Court_Docs/365.pdf

(excerpts)

From: Kent Hovind Page 11

When IRS-CID Special Agent Scott Schneider was questioned on the witness stand he added that he felt “threatened” when Defendant “prayed for him on the radio”.

The Grand Jury Indictment did not name Agent Scott Schneider as the one “threatened” nor did it say what the alleged “threat” was nor how a “prayer on the radio” became a threat.

(2)

http://www.facebook.com/2peter3

From: Kent Hovind Date: February 7, 2013

(excerpts)

BD #12- The Attack- As always, when Satan sees someone trying to serve God he attacks.

The IRS began “investigating” our ministry in 1995.

They could find no law we broke so in 2006 they came in and arrested my wife and I for some of the DUMBEST charges in the history of the world!

I was charged with “threatening an agent” because I prayed for him on the radio! (I got 3 years for that!)

Schneider, who was on the stand for nearly eight hours on Monday, testified that Kent Hovind was confrontational and uncooperative.

On Hovind’s radio show aired over the Internet, the evangelist prayed that something would stop the agents’ investigation.

“We took it seriously and were aware of our own personal safety,” Schneider said.

———————————————-

(Note: The 3 years Kent references was as to Count 58 which alleged that Kent Hovind “did endeavor to obstruct and impede the due administration of the internal revenue laws by acts which include…filing a petition for bankruptcy and falsely listing…filing a false and frivolous lawsuit against the IRS…filing a complaint…against an investigating IRS special agent and the Commissioner of the IRS…making threats of harm to those investigating him and those who may consider cooperating with their investigation…filing a false complaint against investigating IRS agents…filing a criminal complaint against investigating IRS special agents…destroying records…and paying his employees in cash…to avoid payroll tax…”)

Title 18, United States Code, Section 7212(a), makes it a federal crime or offense for anyone to corruptly endeavor to obstruct or impede the due administration of internal revenue laws.

The Defendant can be found guilty of that offense only if both of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

First:

That the Defendant knowingly endeavored to obstruct or impede the due administration of internal revenue laws, as charged; and

Second:

That the Defendant did so corruptly.

To act “corruptly” means to act knowingly and dishonestly with the specific intent to secure and unlawful benefit for oneself or another.

To “endeavor” to impede or obstruct means… However, it is not necessary for the Government to prove…, only that the Defendant corruptly endeavored to do so.

Neither is it necessary for the Government to prove all of the alleged ways and means of committing the charged offense as stated in the indictment.

It would be sufficient if the Government proves beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Defendant committed any one of those alleged ways and means with the corrupt intent to obstruct or impede the due administration of the internal revenue laws…

Bill wrote an extensive defense of Kent Hovind’s tax cheatin’ career some time ago.

Amongst other things, he also provides a little more insight into the radio threat issue:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/sardi/sardi143.html

> “The government alleged that Mr. Hovind threatened > harm to those investigating him and those cooperating > with the investigation, yet when pressed about these > claims, the government said this claim was based upon > Mr. Hovind’s prayer on the radio program he hosted > when he discussed David praying that God would smite > his enemies.”

Short of getting transcripts of the radio show(s) and/or transcripts of the testimony, I guess we are left with having to form our judgment on that based on the various reports; Kent Hovind’s being the least credible from all indications.

Another trivial point going to the issue of how Kent Hovind has overplayed and misrepresented the issue involving his alleged “threats” regarding those investigating his case involves his claim that he “got 3 years for that”.

As previously explained, Kent Hovind did NOT “get 3 years for that” (i.e., praying for Schneider, et al).

Kent Hovind got 3 years on the charge of obstruction, which was not limited to the “prayer” issue.

Furthermore, the 3 years was not 3 MORE years.

Kent Hovind got 10 years on the charges 1-57, and the obstruction charge #58 the 3 years sentence is to run “CONcurrently” with the 10 years.

So, the total sentence was 10 years (two “CONsecutive” 5 year sentences on charges #1-56 and #57) and it would have been 10 years without the obstruction charge #58.